On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 18:09 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tuesday 12 December 2006 18:02, Dave Jones wrote: > > Oh, and there was the 'not really test4, but sort of' release that > > was needed because test3, well.. stunk. There were a number of really > > nasty bugs in that which meant it wouldn't even install for quite a > > few people. How that one got out the building alive is anyones guess. > > Our internal testing procedures have hopefully improved since then though, > > and with the livecd on the horizon, we should see some of the > > 'it doesnt boot' bugs a lot sooner if we do daily spins of that iso > > and push it out with the daily rawhide push. > > Well, I couldn't duplicate these problems on any of the systems I was doing > validation on. Unfortunately we were hoping that more people were actually > trying to install rawhide more often than they were, instead of just doing > yum updates. I plan on using mini-freezes and more snapshot iso releases to > aid in this, so that more people are trying the install that way rather than > just yum update. Hopefully we'll catch more braindead stuff this way. Bit of a chicken/egg problem, but I intend to try every test release via a xen instance if it's possible. As this technology moves forward, I think it's going to become more and more common for people to use virtual machines for initial testing. Not many folks have spare machines laying around and xen, kvm, openvz, vmware, $virt-tech-of-the-day make it "easy" to test some of the new shiny stuff while keeping their machines stable. josh _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
